Blackwell Reference Online

Extract

In this chapter I argue that urban landscape changes are simultaneously the medium and outcome of the intersection of different sets of values. In other words, urban forms result from and contribute to the conflicts between different value systems, often represented by economic values privileging growth and redevelopment on one end of the spectrum, and more symbolic values giving prominence to, inter alia, the conservation of heritage and culture, on the other. Oftentimes, such value systems reflect the interests of different social, economic, and political groups, whose divergences take shape variously as contestation between state and civil society, for example, between urban planners and heritage groups, or tourism planners and local interest groups. Such value conflicts, it may be argued, shape the different identities that different groups (wish to) construct for their cities. At the risk of oversimplification, it may be said that pro-development groups are concerned with developing a city that is characterized by modernity while pro-heritage groups are more enamored by cities identified with history, culture, and other symbolic values. In this chapter I will illustrate these relationships between value conflicts, urban identities, and landscape changes using the example of Singapore. As a city-state, Singapore provides a unique case study for the analysis of how state policies ... log in or subscribe to read full text